Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.

Someone should - people keep attacking darwin and darwanism as if what he wrote is still current. It is not. Our knowledge of the process of Evolution has moved on massively since his day. It makes as much sense to "Question Darwin" on Evolution as it does to question Newton about alchemy.

Except that Alchemy doesn't work, and nor does astrology, or at least that is what the result suggest.

Perhaps a better analogy would be to ignore how amazingly much Newton got right and argue that somehow that whole of physics is a faith based scientific religion (as creationists would if anything there conflicted with genesis) on the grounds that Newton knew nothing about black holes, Quantum mechanics or sub atomic particles.

That very goo You tube remarks on how much Darwin got right. He knew that there were gaps in the evidence, but that is the strength of the theory - it makes prediction. He predicted that ought to be be transitional fossils and quite a lot have been found, There is really nothing amongst the huge amount of evidence that points in any direction than evolution. Creationism has really nothing.

It does what it can by taking bits of it and trying to make it look like ti would work in a Creationist scenario, but it only does it by leaving out the bits that don't fit. In a way it's like quotemining evidence.

There are still gaps. The 'Pre-cambrian' was a gap - there was nothing known and this together with the 'Cambrian explosion' was presented as evidence of creation. Now of course we have found the pre- cambrian fossils, and though hte 'cambrian explosion' crops up now and again, it is a dead duck.

We have a gap in speciation of a kind that would really look convincing. But that would take a few hundred thousand years, maybe to get a cat with a gliding membrane or an Otter turning fishlike and staying in the water or indeed a chimp becoming bipedal and forming disinctly humanlike social groups with communal activities. Though of course that would still be dismissed as 'it's still a cat. It's still an Otter. just turned it legs into flippers. And they are just chimps that have learned to do stuff. It isn't proof of Macro -evolution.

Nothing would be, it seems, but having time travel.

"Yep That'll do for me. Short of inventing time travel, there is no proof of evolution that I will accept."

Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.